Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36615057›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022

Comparison of Remimazolam-Flumazenil versus Propofol for Rigid Bronchoscopy: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.

Yafei Pan, Mo Chen, Fulei Gu, Jinyan Chen, Wen Zhang, Zhangxiang Huang, Dapeng Zhu, Jia Song, Jun Fang, Weifeng Yu and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
7.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Anesthesia for Bronchoscopy-An Update.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Yafei PanDepartment of Anesthesiology, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, Research Center for Neuro-Oncology Interaction, Institute of Basic Medicine and Cancer (IBMC), Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hangzhou 310022, China.
Mo ChenGraduate School, Wannan Medical College, Wuhu 241000, China.
Fulei GuGraduate School, Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou 325035, China.
Jinyan ChenGraduate School, Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou 325035, China.
Wen ZhangDepartment of Anesthesiology, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, Research Center for Neuro-Oncology Interaction, Institute of Basic Medicine and Cancer (IBMC), Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hangzhou 310022, China.
Zhangxiang HuangDepartment of Anesthesiology, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, Research Center for Neuro-Oncology Interaction, Institute of Basic Medicine and Cancer (IBMC), Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hangzhou 310022, China.
Dapeng ZhuDepartment of Endoscopy, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, Institute of Basic Medicine and Cancer (IBMC), Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hangzhou 310022, China.
Jia SongDepartment of Endoscopy, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, Institute of Basic Medicine and Cancer (IBMC), Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hangzhou 310022, China.
Jun FangDepartment of Anesthesiology, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, Research Center for Neuro-Oncology Interaction, Institute of Basic Medicine and Cancer (IBMC), Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hangzhou 310022, China.
Weifeng YuDepartment of Anesthesiology, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, Research Center for Neuro-Oncology Interaction, Institute of Basic Medicine and Cancer (IBMC), Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hangzhou 310022, China.
Kangjie XieDepartment of Anesthesiology, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, Research Center for Neuro-Oncology Interaction, Institute of Basic Medicine and Cancer (IBMC), Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hangzhou 310022, China.
Chinese Academy of Sciences · CNZhejiang Cancer Hospital · CNWenzhou Medical University · CNWannan Medical College · CN

Funding

the General Project of the Zhejiang Provincial Health Science and Technology Plan 2021KY546 and 2021KY548the Zhejiang Provincial Health Science and Technology Program Young Innovative Talents Project 2022RC015
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Remimazolam is a novel ultrashort-acting intravenous benzodiazepine sedative−hypnotic that significantly reduces the times to sedation onset and recovery. This trial was conducted to confirm the recovery time from anesthesia of remimazolam-flumazenil versus propofol in patients undergoing endotracheal surgery under rigid bronchoscopy. Methods: Patients undergoing endotracheal tumor resection or stent implantation were randomly allocated into a remimazolam group (Group R) or a propofol group (Group P). The primary outcome was the recovery time from general anesthesia. The secondary outcomes were the time to loss of consciousness (LoC), hemodynamic fluctuations, and adverse events. Results: A total of 34 patients were screened, and 30 patients were enrolled in the study. The recovery time was significantly shorter for Group R (140 ± 52 s) than for Group P (374 ± 195 s) (p < 0.001). The times to LoC were 76 ± 40 s in Group R and 75 ± 25 s in Group P and were not significantly different. There were also no significant differences in hemodynamic fluctuations or adverse events between the two groups. Conclusions: The recovery time from general anesthesia in rigid bronchoscopy patients was shorter using remimazolam-flumazenil than with propofol, with no dramatic hemodynamic fluctuations and adverse events or differences between the agents. Remimazolam-flumazenil allows for faster recovery from anesthesia than propofol.

Indexed as

flumazenilhemodynamic fluctuationsloss of consciousnesspropofolrecovery time from anesthesiaremimazolamrigid bronchoscopy

Identifiers

PMID36615057
PMCPMC9821250
OpenAlexW4313238616

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.